Parallels between V for Vendetta and the present day
The movie "V for Vendetta" (2006) is laced with thinly veiled corellations between the fictional world of the film and and the real world we all know and love. Although the literary work was published back when today's leaders were still young bucks, the script was written by the Wachowski brothers to bring the subject material up to date. The resulting innuendo is therefore fully intentional. In this writeup I will outline the significant content that I was able to pick out. If I have missed any, or made an error, please feel free to message me with that information.
References to any subversive as a terrorist. The definition of a terrorist is someone who uses violence against random people to exert political influence. In the movie and around the world, the term is frequently - albeit intentionally - misapplied to anyone who fights to oppose government aims. Because it carries implicitly negative connotations, the stamp of terrorist (an actual stamp at one point in the movie) tends to delegitimate a particular cause.
Chancellor Sutler and Donald Rumsfeld. The Chancellor in the movie has risen from the position of Defense Secretary to essentially military dictator. At one point a character observes that "all he knows how to do" is military action. I believe this is a suggestion that, even in an advanced society like Britain or the United States, a military official might rise from the ranks to seize control in a time of instability. Not necessarily feasible, but it has happened before.
Chancellor Sutler and Adolf Hitler. Although not recent, this parallel bears mentioning. The quintessential moral charismatic leader, Sutler's similarities to Hitler (even the name) are some of the most bare-faced in the entire movie. There is more than one scene of him delivering an impassioned speech while the army parades below the podium. Just like Hitler, he catapulted to the top as the leader of a popular fascist, nationalistic political party. The greatest significance I find in this connection is what history teaches us about the present and future. The potential for a key figure to seize control at the right (wrong?) time, and thereby wield considerable authority and power, is still very real.
The Reclamation, the Holocaust, and US policy. In the "Reclamation" which predates the timeline of the movie, a large number of undesirables were gathered up by a secret police force and removed from society. Non-christians, homosexuals, minorities and political dissidents are included as immoral or unpatriotic. Similar cleansing took place during the Holocaust, and some fear that another episode is not too far away. With the recent focus on "family values," exclusion of "others," and the "War on Terror," it is not entirely unthinkable. Certain elements in society and government are openly hostile toward gays and lesbians, "foreigners" (especially those of Hispanic, Arab, or Asian descent), and Liberals. US policy now permits racial profiling, massive intrusions on privacy in the name of "national security," and indefinite detention.
The media and the Culture of Fear. The British government in the movie attempts to maintain control through manipulation of the media. There are two primary goals there, to gloss over things unfavorable to the government and to instill fear in the population and thereby keep it pliable. A common accusation cast at the White House is that it keeps close contact with media outlets to help steer public opinion. Also claimed is that the government and the media together promote a "culture of fear" by constantly keeping disease and violence at the forefront. In the movie, a news broadcast waves around the danger of impending doom from various sources, including a brief reference to avian flu. Although the media in America is far more free than the government-owned outlets featured in the movie, there is enough of a similarity to give one pause.
Talk show pundits. People in the movie have their very own angry conservative talk show host, scarily similar in its satire to a few we have here in real life. The TV character speaks vehemently to the camera from the perspective of the religious right, practically channeling Bill O'Reilly. He also intones "ladies and gentlemen" and pops pills just like everyone's favorite, Rush Limbaugh. Also like the aformentioned party mouthpieces, some people in the film seem to get tired of his blowhard ranting. It's somewhat disturbing that the writers take great pleasure in setting him up on a self-worshiping throne before doing way with him in a particularly humiliating way.
Electronic surveillance. One part of the movie features a roving vehicle, scanning conversations en masse for certain keywords. Although seemingly exaggerated, this is remarkably similar to what is conjectured by experts to be common US surveillance practices. The suspected programs are too secret to be properly understood, but the technology has been developed to monitor voice and data traffic using computers to do the analysis. Domestic intelligence is key to the US government and others.
Torture and tribunals. In the world of V, torture and special tribunals have become a routine part of life. This is a timely warning, as over the last few years the US government has been fiercely arguing that it is perfectly within its legal rights to carry these things out. Waterboarding, shown in the movie, is one of the techniques that they believe should be permissible. Some people may believe this is an acceptable cost to defeat the terrorists. What about when American citizens are being submitted to the same treatment, as has already happened? This is one of the dangers of permitting government power to go too far.
Extraordinary rendition. Creedy's secret police in the movie, a frightening amalgamation of FBI/CIA/NSA/KGB/Gestapo, are empowered to "disappear" anyone at will. They seem to make their own rules, handling prisoners brutally and whisking them away to locations unknown. While the "rendition" of citizens is not yet being seen in the US as a widespread practice, the government has placed that power within their reach by arguing that it is in everyone's best interest for some people to be imprisoned incognito in overseas detention centers.
Peaceful revolution. The theme of bloodless revolution resonates with the events in former Soviet republics in 2005 and 2006. It has been shown that governments can be forced to change through popular demonstrations when leaders stray from the interests of the people. Few could imagine that such an event could happen in the United States, but I hope that when it becomes necessary that it will.
Seeing the obvious connections, it is clear that much of V for Vendetta's message comes directly from the political convictions of the movie makers. One shouldn't assume that my interpretations of those connections mean that I unreservedly endorse them. I do tend to sympathise with the position, but I think that it is important to keep in mind that this is a movie, and naturally exaggerates and emphasizes things beyond their actual significance. I have great faith in our system and believe that the situation depicted in the film will never come to materialize in our world. For the most part, its usefulness ends at being entertaining and providing a feeling of self-gratification. If you haven't seen the movie, please do...I've tried not to spoil it too badly.